Liberal Alan Tudge likely to get portfolio back after ex-lover Rachelle Miller said she won’t give evidence to inquiry

Liberal frontbencher Alan Tudge is likely to return to his portfolio after his ex-lover decided not to give evidence to a ministerial conduct inquiry.

The ex-lover of Liberal frontbencher Alan Tudge will not give evidence to a ministerial conduct inquiry in a move that is likely to allow the Prime Minister to return the Victorian MP to his portfolio.

By choosing not to participate in the process on the grounds the process is flawed and a “political fix”, it bolsters the likelihood that there will be no adverse findings against Mr Tudge.

Rachelle Miller has repeatedly claimed she was bullied and mistreated in Mr Tudge’s office while he was also conducting a sexual relationship with her. Mr Tudge strenuously denies the claims although he admits to a consensual sexual relationship with his staffer that he “deeply regrets.”

In a statement to news.com.au, Ms Miller said the Morrison Government had not listened to her concerns about the terms of reference or agreed to provide her with a full copy of any final report. As a result of her concerns regarding the process she could not participate.

Federal member of parliament Alan Tudge arrives at the 2017 Midwinter Ball in the company of Liberal staffer Rachelle Miller who he was having an affair with.

The report, which is being prepared by respected investigator Vivienne Thom, is due to be handed to the Prime Minister and cabinet on January 28.

Since December, her lawyers have complained about the refusal to examine her claim that Mr Tudge once kicked her out of bed when she was naked after sex while in her employment as his press secretary on the grounds it could involve an allegation of physical assault. Mr Tudge has strongly denied her claims.

“I informed the Government that I would not participate in the inquiry, as long as the terms of reference forbade it from investigating any allegations which might amount to criminal conduct,’’ Ms Miller said in a statement to news.com.au.

Ms Miller has not contacted the police over the incident.

“I complained about the terms of reference immediately when they were made available to me.

“The Government has not listened to the concerns I expressed and has refused to negotiate the terms of reference. The sanitisation of the inquiry in this way all but guarantees the Government the positive view of history in relation to these events which suits its agenda, its view of the world and its immediate political interests.

Ms Miller also suggested the government was engaging in a “political fix” ahead of the election.

“The terms of reference of Dr Thom’s inquiry into Dyson Heydon involved five months of negotiation. By contrast, I was sent the terms of reference for this Inquiry two weeks after it was announced, as a fait accompli and I was immediately under pressure to commit to an interview with Dr Thom before Christmas to allow her sufficient time to produce her findings in line with the Government’s indecent and wholly self-serving deadline. The Heydon Inquiry took almost a year to deliver findings.

“The Government’s rush to judgment and sanitising of the terms of reference smacks of a political fix. What other reason dictates this Inquiry being done and dusted in this way, on these terms, before the start of the parliamentary year?

Rachelle Miller holds a press conference at Parliament House, Canberra. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Ms Miller, who had a sexual relationship with Mr Tudge in 2017, held a press conference at Parliament House on December 2 outlining new allegations.

She said while she has previously described the relationship as consensual, it was also complex.

“I am fully aware that a year ago I said my relationship with Minister Alan Tudge was a consensual relationship, but it’s more complicated than that,’’ she said.

“I was so ashamed, so humiliated, so scared, so exhausted. I told the small part of my story I was able to manage.

“Meanwhile, the PM’s men were out, briefing against me to the media. This relationship was defined by a significant power imbalance.”

During one trip to Kalgoorlie with then Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to announce the Cashless Welfare Card trial, Ms Miller said Mr Tudge encouraged her to stay up late drinking.

She woke up naked in his hotel room.

“My mobile phone started ringing. I woke up in the pitch black dark and reached for my phone,’’ she said.

“It was about 4am and a morning media producer was calling about the front-page story, wanting to line up an interview with the Minister.

“[The Minister] was furious, telling me to ‘get the f*ck out of his bed’. I quickly told the producer I would call her back. I then realised I was completely naked.

“I fell off the side of the bed and ended up on the floor. I searched around in the dark for my clothes. He was yelling at me that ‘my phone had woken him up. He needed to get more sleep’.”

Alan Tudge during a press conference in Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gary Ramage

Mr Tudge has firmly rebutted Ms Miller’s claims, telling news.com.au: “I completely and utterly reject Ms Miller’s version of events.

“Ms Miller and I had a consensual affair in 2017 as both of us have publicly acknowledged. This is something I deeply regret.”

Ms Miller also declined to participate in a previous investigation by Spark Helmore on legal advice.

In a statement to news.com.au on November 9, 2021, a spokesman for Mr Tudge said there were “no adverse findings” against him.

“While respecting the confidentiality of the process, I can confirm that the independent assessment by law firm Sparke Helmore and the Department of Finance was completed in early June 2021 and there were no adverse findings against Mr Tudge,” the spokesman said.

On December 8, 2020, Ms Miller’s lawyers wrote to the Prime Minister’s chief of staff John Kunkel raising concerns about how the new Thom inquiry would be conducted.

The Australian Government Solicitor’s office later responded outlining the proposed terms of reference for the investigation.

It revealed the inquiry would consider the statement made by Ms Miller on 2 December 2021; any further evidence obtained by the inquiry, including through interviews and any further documentary searches; and subject to necessary approval and consent being obtained, the findings of the review undertaken by the Department of Finance in response to the formal complaint made by Ms Miller in 2020.

The inquiry might also look into: the nature and timing of Mr Tudge’s relationship with Ms Miller; and any other matter relevant to assessing Mr Tudge’s conduct in relation to the Standards.

However, it said the inquiry would not investigate into any conduct which may amount to a criminal offence.

“Any such matters should immediately be referred to the appropriate authorities, subject to Ms Miller’s wishes,’’ the correspondence stated.

On December 14, Ms Miller’s legal team wrote to the Australian Government solicitor raising concerns about a number of aspects of the inquiry including the fact she may never get a copy of the report.

“Your letter contends that our client might not be entitled to a ‘complete copy’ of the report following the ‘independent inquiry’,’’ her lawyer Peter Gordon wrote.

“We do not consider there to be any proper basis to deny our client a complete copy of the report. Please advise the basis upon which you contend that our client might be denied a copy, or complete copy, of the report.”

Students protesting the attendance of Minister for Education Alan Tudge after Rachelle Miller’s allegations.

On December 21, the Australian Government Solicitor responded that while it would agree to hand over a copy of the final report this was subject to any other participants in the inquiry claiming privacy.

“The Commonwealth will provide a complete copy of the report to Ms Miller, subject to any claim for confidentiality, privacy or privilege that might be asserted by a third party,’’ it said.

“This is necessary to ensure that Dr Thom has available to her all relevant information, as some third parties may only provide information on the basis that it remains confidential.”

On January 18, the Australian Government Solicitor wrote to Ms Miller’s lawyers noting that Dr Thom’s “is continuing her work and our client anticipates receipt of her report in line with the Terms of Reference.

“The opportunity for Ms Miller to engage with Dr Thom presently remains open, noting that the timing of the report remains a matter for Dr Thom. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you would like to discuss that opportunity,’’ the letter stated.

Ms Miller’s lawyers advised the government on January 19 that she would not participate.

“None of your correspondence cures the fundamental flaws which our previous correspondence described as to the terms of reference for Dr Thom’s Inquiry. Because of that, our client has objected to the Inquiry as presently configured and will not participate in the inquiry,’’ he wrote.